Broadly similarly - while Ken Livingstone is (or has become, I don't remember the GLC too well cos I was v young) a self-serving arsehole who tries to be controversial in unforgivable ways, the media witchhunt around him is something else. Give it a rest until inflammatory racialised comments are punished on every occasion, not just when they coincide with the wishes of right-wing tabloid owners/editors.

Boris Johnson intoning gravely on issues of racism and discrimination? What parallel dimension are we in?

Boris Johnson intoning gravely on issues of racism and discrimination? What parallel dimension are we in?

Well yeeesss...but at the same time, being a hypocrite doesn't actually make him wrong, does it?

It can't all be blamed on "right-wing media witch-hunts", either. I dunno about you but my FB and Twitter feeds are chock full of people who are lifelong Labour voters, members of the party even, who are furious about KL and what they see as Corbyn's utterly inadequate response.

There's probably also an element of double standards, in that everyone knows the Tory party has always been riddled with bigots, whereas Labour are supposed to be, you know, the good guys.

Well yeeesss...but at the same time, being a hypocrite doesn't actually make him wrong, does it?

It can't all be blamed on "right-wing media witch-hunts", either. I dunno about you but my FB and Twitter feeds are chock full of people who are lifelong Labour voters, members of the party even, who are furious about KL and what they see as Corbyn's utterly inadequate response.

There's probably also an element of double standards, in that everyone knows the Tory party has always been riddled with bigots, whereas Labour are supposed to be, you know, the good guys.

Not being wrong is not a sufficient standard. Might as well have Stuart Hall offering commentary on why the football child sex abuse scandal is terrible, if that's the only criterion. It acts as an unwarranted public rehabilitation for career media racists like BJ, which is ethically (and in every other way) repugnant.

There's more than an element of double standards to the Livingstone affair; it's a textbook example of how they play out in public life, particularly with a media fiercely invested in discrediting the Left, and powerful enough to concentrate the public conversation almost solely upon the racism that most certainly does feature on the Left, and disguise the fact that it is endemic in the Tory Party (obvs).

Fine for people with basic morals to hang Livingstone out to dry. But this isn't motivated by actual concern about anti-semitism from the Tory Party (as if!) - it's political. I think it's possible and appropriate to criticise both Livingstone and the oh-so-cynical tactics of the right wing.

Baboon, your post above mentions Boris Johnson, the Tory party (twice) and 'the right wing' - you make some good points as far as that all goes, but I'm talking about the criticism that has come from within Labour itself or from within the broader Left. Or, indeed, from Jewish organizations or individuals who aren't aligned with any party but are concerned about hearing such inflammatory statements coming from a senior figure in the political establishment.

Originally Posted by droid

Livingstone is primarily a twonk rather than a racist...

Lol yeah, we should all just give Ken "Hitler Hitler Hitler, Jews don't vote Labour because they're all filthy rich, Hitler Hitler Hitler" Livingston the benefit of the doubt. Again.

Really, you're both illustrating extremely well the fact that antisemitism is the only form of racism that many on the left instinctively react to with a shrug, a smirk or a kneejerk counter-accusation of conspiracy and witch-hunt.

Livingstone has to go, whatever. He's damaging the LP by association, and he doesn't seem to give a shit.

But this has to be accompanied by a serious attack on the Tories' abysmal record around race. Any party that allows itself to be branded racist by Theresa May without a savage counterattack is a fucking disaster.

Well yes, it should be both. Unfortunately Corbyn is unwilling to properly discipline an old comrade like Livingstone and unable, for whatever reason, to offer much in the way of opposition to a Tory government that's been hijacked by the party's lunatic fringe. Perhaps in large part because, on the matter of the biggest issue of the day, he's fundamentally in agreement with them.

Really, you're both illustrating extremely well the fact that antisemitism is the only form of racism that many on the left instinctively react to with a shrug, a smirk or a kneejerk counter-accusation of conspiracy and witch-hunt.

Er, I said Livingstone should go? But don't let what I actually said get in the way of your rant.

(now comes my rant)

And it's not a 'kneejerk counter-accusation' to suggest that any concern about racism coming from the Tory Party is laughable. It's not a conspiracy, it's a very clear political tactic.

If comments with extremely suspect undertones in terms of 'race' are a crime for which the punishment is ejection from the political party - as they should be - then Livingstone should be gone obviously (as above), but so should Boris Johnson, Zac Goldsmith and half the Tory Party. Selective morality is worse than no morality at all, because it's utterly unconnected with ethics and driven by cynical opportunism. At least you know where you are when people say what they really think...

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...r-zionism-jews David Baddiel's article on KL is quite good - "The real problem, in a way, is the tone of Livingstone when giving this interpretation. There’s no sympathy. No compassion – no sense of the tragedy behind this." is more on point than anything else I've read. Actually engaging with what was said in an incisive way, is an underrated way of approaching this kind of media storm.

Lol yeah, we should all just give Ken "Hitler Hitler Hitler, Jews don't vote Labour because they're all filthy rich, Hitler Hitler Hitler" Livingston the benefit of the doubt. Again.

Really, you're both illustrating extremely well the fact that antisemitism is the only form of racism that many on the left instinctively react to with a shrug, a smirk or a kneejerk counter-accusation of conspiracy and witch-hunt.

Far be it from me to leap in front of your hobby horse yet again, but I was speaking specifically of the recent furore over Ken's zionist comment which I went to considerable effort to dismantle at the time (In the face of particularly pathetic opposition from yourself and Vim I might add).

His kapo comment several years earlier was of the same ilk. Idiotic, insensitive, possibly motivated by some level of racism, but also, no doubt a result of years of political accusations of anti-semitism due to his position on Israel.

Er, I said Livingstone should go? But don't let what I actually said get in the way of your rant.

Well hang on, you only explicitly said he should go after my above post about accusations of witch-hunting and whatnot. And my main point was that your last few posts have been about 10% "Yeah Ken is being kind of a dick here" and 90% "RAARRGH, THE TORIES, THE TORIES, THE TORIES!!!!". A lot of it has sounded rather like 'tu quoque', to be honest. My point was that KL (and by extension, Corbyn) has faced heavy criticism from within his own party and from non-aligned groups and individuals, so whatever the Tories are doing or saying is irrelevant in that respect.

But be that as it may: Tories in 'criticizing Labour' shocka! What do you expect? The parties have been bitter rivals for the 117 years that Labour has existed.

Originally Posted by droid

Far be it from me to leap in front of your hobby horse yet again...

What you did in that thread was give a lawyer-like breakdown of every word that KL said, while ignoring the spirit of it, which was "Zionists were in cahoots with Hitler; Hitler is the very definition of badness; ergo Zionism is likewise bad". As succinctly explained by David Baddiel in that excellent piece that baboon quoted from.

Moreover, I notice you've changed your tune from "KL is an idiot but not a racist" to "possibly motivated by some level of racism", which is a bit of a step change. Even so, I can't imagine you being this pedantic about the precise, technical definition of 'racism' if we were talking about someone who'd been accused of demonstrating prejudice against Muslims or black people, for example.

What you did in that thread was give a lawyer-like breakdown of every word that KL said, while ignoring the spirit of it, which was "Zionists were in cahoots with Hitler; Hitler is the very definition of badness; ergo Zionism is likewise bad". As succinctly explained by David Baddiel in that excellent piece that baboon quoted from.

Nope. What I did in that thread was tear your ignorant hysterics to pieces and your response was the usual reflexive intellectual dishonesty, followed now by the usual attempt to gloss over your nonsense.